Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, oversight, Administrators
2,260
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 9:
Line 9: +
Talk:Liberal wordiness (view source)
Revision as of 17:36, November 17, 2009
, 17:36, November 17, 2009no edit summary
Another user has proposed this article for deletion, and I have to say I agree. The premise itself is ridiculous and seems to have been devised solely within the context of this website. Of course a literary theorist is going to use more complex language than a statesman, they're addressing completely different audiences. [[User:DWiggins|DWiggins]] 12:24, 17 November 2009 (EST)
Another user has proposed this article for deletion, and I have to say I agree. The premise itself is ridiculous and seems to have been devised solely within the context of this website. Of course a literary theorist is going to use more complex language than a statesman, they're addressing completely different audiences. [[User:DWiggins|DWiggins]] 12:24, 17 November 2009 (EST)
:The audiences is a fair point, but I'd have you compare spades with spades: the down to earth speeches of conservatives with the confusing, rambling diatribes of a Kerry or Clinton; the incomprehensible nonsense of liberal marxist-revisionist historians with easy-to-comprehend conservative histories. Actually, the matter of audience is very important, as liberals ''try'' to exclude their audience. "Can't understand? Just trust the experts, US." I see the article's creator is an uncertain user, but the topic is a real one, as you can see from its place in [[Liberal style]]. Perhaps improve or correct before crying wolf? [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 12:36, 17 November 2009 (EST)